Jump to content

Recommended Posts

From the designer Q&A thread:

20 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:
20 hours ago, HerrTom said:

I'm curious, what is that one thing that you so very much wanted to get into the title but didn't make the cut?

For me the biggest thing that comes readily to mind was a minor change to the way aircraft work. I wanted to implement a change for aircraft that would allow them to release multiple munitions per pass. So for example, an F-16 could fly in and drop all its cluster bombs at once on a single targeted area. Same goes for any unguided munition, like dumb bombs. 

Unfortunately there just was not enough time in development for that change to be implemented, tested, approved and shipped. Maybe at some point in the future though. 

So hopefully if we've lead good, clean lives, we could get some linear aircraft fire missions and realistic one-and-done passes for fast movers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Marwek77 aka Red Reporter said:

Is it possible to do carpet bombing? Is it possible to let the plane simply drop all bombs in once and fly home?

So for it drops one bomb and then is coming around andradio chatting and I am waiting and waiting.

Cluster ammo is fine, but throw the all in once! Do you know how?

All aircraft at this time should be dropping dumb ordnance in salvo.  Making multiple passes would be far less effective against the target and suicide versus air defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, akd said:

All aircraft at this time should be dropping dumb ordnance in salvo.  Making multiple passes would be far less effective against the target and suicide versus air defense.

I fly IL2.  Even during WW2, you made one pass and dumped all ordinance on a single target whenever air defenses are present.  Anything else is a death wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did request a while ago for aircraft to be able to drop multiple (all) of their unguided bombs in a single pass, but as I mentioned in the other thread Tom linked to, there just was not time to implement it.

It is still on the list of things to hopefully get to. Beyond that, I can't promise anything. Hopefully we see it eventually, but there is no guarantee. 

Also, a quick word on Soviet fixed wing aircraft; they should essentially never be used if we are being strictly realistic. Soviet fixed wing aircraft were never meant to provide a CAS role. They were meant to strike different types of targets than combat units engaged with friendly units. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

Also, a quick word on Soviet fixed wing aircraft; they should essentially never be used if we are being strictly realistic. Soviet fixed wing aircraft were never meant to provide a CAS role. They were meant to strike different types of targets than combat units engaged with friendly units. 

What about Su-25? I always thought they were primarily CAS aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The Su-25 was originally envisaged more as a light bomber rather than for CAS work specifically.  The original role would see it striking targets like command posts and doing BAI against columns behind the front lines.

Now, around this timeframe the Soviets were experimenting with close air support in Afghanistan, but that doctrinal experimentation with the Grach didn't really take off for a few more years past the game's timeframe.  The Soviet-Afghan War by the Frunze Academy and annotated by Lester Grau (in English) is a good look into that.

Edit: You can certainly see the shift in focus (or perhaps more accurately expanded doctrinal role?) with the T and SM upgrades in the 90s and 00s adding much enhanced capabilities to identify and engage single targets in an expedient manner, as would be necessary on FEBA.

Edited by HerrTom
More info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, mrzafka said:

What about Su-25? I always thought they were primarily CAS aircraft.

Ninja'd by @HerrTom, who did a great job of explaining things. 

The Su-25 is usually referred to as the Soviet A-10, but that isn't really the case. They are designed to operate closest to friendly ground forces, but it is still mostly an attack or strike aircraft. Here is a definition that might prove somewhat useful for conceptualizing its role:

Quote

The Su-25 is designed to defeat small mobile and stationary ground targets and to engage low-speed air targets at the forward edge and in the nearest tactical and operational depth.

From: https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/su25/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, KungFuTreachery said:

I believe Soviet doctrine held that fixed-wing air was for striking targets behind the FEBA, not on the front line itself.

Honestly, I think CM would be a better game if it didn't feature aircraft at all, and left them as something outside of scope (and limited to the pre-battle phase). It does a pretty poor job of modelling them (they're too effectively co-ordinated for most of the WW2 titles, and not sophisticated enough for the modern titles), their use in scenarios and quick battles tends to be extremely random and binary, etc., etc. 

Even in the situations where it's tactically relevant, it's basically a dice roll, and not a terribly interesting one. It's obviously important in the modern titles to have some CAS coordination, but really it's only barely within the purview of a CM battle.

Edited by domfluff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, KungFuTreachery said:

I believe Soviet doctrine held that fixed-wing air was for striking targets behind the FEBA, not on the front line itself.

Correct.

I agree with @domfluff when it comes to aircraft. I think that a few tweaks would go a long way to how they are in game. Longer loiter times (when not being shot at) and larger area missions I think would be a good start. Plus, allowing aircraft to come in and drop all their bombs in one pass would make them both more effective, more survivable, and more realistic, especially in Cold War. 

There are certainly other fixes/tweaks that could be implemented but those are a few things that come immediately to mind that I think would have a positive effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Marwek77 aka Red Reporter said:

Ok, so no aircraft in mission for Soviet side.

But what about Helicopters? They are more blind then my grandfather...

Yup, gunships were the primary CAS suppliers for the Soviets. But they were also relatively rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, domfluff said:

Honestly, I think CM would be a better game if it didn't feature aircraft at all, and left them as something outside of scope (and limited to the pre-battle phase). It does a pretty poor job of modelling them (they're too effectively co-ordinated for most of the WW2 titles, and not sophisticated enough for the modern titles), their use in scenarios and quick battles tends to be extremely random and binary, etc., etc. 

Even in the situations where it's tactically relevant, it's basically a dice roll, and not a terribly interesting one. It's obviously important in the modern titles to have some CAS coordination, but really it's only barely within the purview of a CM battle.

You’re right, but if memory serves me right air support was one of community favorites. I think anti-aircraft fire was added as a new feature in the Market Garden (or even earlier?) module, so it seems Battlefront perhaps will develop this part of the game in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big thing lacking for me with air support is the lim

3 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

Correct.

I agree with @domfluff when it comes to aircraft. I think that a few tweaks would go a long way to how they are in game. Longer loiter times (when not being shot at) and larger area missions I think would be a good start. Plus, allowing aircraft to come in and drop all their bombs in one pass would make them both more effective, more survivable, and more realistic, especially in Cold War. 

There are certainly other fixes/tweaks that could be implemented but those are a few things that come immediately to mind that I think would have a positive effect. 

I agree this is the main problem. For me its the limited area attack zones, and not being able to dictate which bombs to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mrzafka said:

anti-aircraft fire was added as a new feature in the Market Garden

I think that is correct.

AA fire in CW is glorious - if you have the right AA assets on map. Testing it was a total blast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...